Sen. Tom Cotton has 1619 problems, but revision ain't one

[Professor Emeritus]

Since you’re probably going to start crying about forum rules and call me a white supremacist, here’s an article pointing out the projects short-comings from another of it proponents.

The Fallacy of 1619: Rethinking the History of Africans in Early America | AAIHS

Please advise if I’m following the rules to your liking.

What's the point of posting a random critique of the project that has nothing whatsoever to do with your previous comment? There is zero chance you had even read that critique when you commented.

And I never called you a White Supremacist. I didn't even know you were White until now, I just said that you were AFFIRMING White Supremacy when you credited American domination with keeping the world more peaceful. Now that I look at your history and I see you're a White American of Italian descent who keeps trying to downplay the importance of slavery with comments like, "Well my grandparents weren't slaveowners so I didn't benefit from slavery at all!" and "Most white people weren't even slaveowners!", well....just like a good history teacher, I'll let everyone come to their own conclusions.

 

[Shogun]

What's the point of posting a random critique of the project that has nothing whatsoever to do with your previous comment? There is zero chance you had even read that critique when you commented.

And I never called you a White Supremacist. I didn't even know you were White until now, I just said that you were AFFIRMING White Supremacy when you credited American domination with keeping the world more peaceful. Now that I look at your history and I see you're a White American of Italian descent who keeps trying to downplay the importance of slavery with comments like, "Well my grandparents weren't slaveowners so I didn't benefit from slavery at all!" and "Most white people weren't even slaveowners!", well....just like a good history teacher, I'll let everyone come to their own conclusions.

I teach history.
I use parts of the 1619 project.
The very introduction of it acknowledges it’s not historical research, that’s it presenting a competing narrative.
I posted that article (and could post more if you’re interested), which points out the factual historical inaccuracies of the project, because my initial comment that you called ridiculous was commenting on the article titles claim that the 1619 project teaches history accurately. That’s not even the stated goal of the project’s authors.

Also, fabricating quotes and attributing them to me surely must violate forum rules, which you’re so heavy on. No?

 

[Shogun]

That's exactly how interpretation of history is SUPPOSED to be taught. The idea that teachers pass on unquestionable truth to students about how they should interpret the psat is bullshyt propaganda. We can't even agree how to interpret the incidents that are happening right now and you think there's "one right way" to interpret the meaning of events 400 years ago that all teachers should force upon their students?

Was slavery "essential" to the character of early America or an unfortunate aberration? Should Black Americans be central in the retelling of each era of this country's past or should the be treated as a side issue? Was the desire to preserve slavery a primary reason the colonists chose to rebel, or was that just a side benefit?

None of those questions can be answered conclusively because they rely on subjective interpretation and knowing the internal thought processes of people whose thoughts we'll never have access to. The best teachers of history lay out the facts that we know (or the best guesses that we know, in the many cases where the exact facts are uncertain) and then offer differing possible interpretations of those facts. THAT is the most accurate teaching of history. If you went to college post-1970s and took a single decent history class you should know this.

There’s documented evidence of the project’s inaccuracies. The title is ironic, is all.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

I teach history.

Are there black kids who are subjected to you or just white ones?

The very introduction of it acknowledges it’s not historical research, that’s it presenting a competing narrative.

The whole point of the project is to offer a competing narrative. But you claimed they didn't intend to be accurate, which is NOT the meaning of a competing narrative.

I posted that article (and could post more if you’re interested), which points out the factual historical inaccuracies of the project, because me initially comment that you called ridiculous was commenting on the the article title claim that the 1619 project teaches history accurately. That’s not even the states goal of the project’s authors.

His point wasn't a true "factual inaccuracy". He took issue with the project focusing the start of the black American narrative in 1619. But the counterexamples he gave were two failed colonies, one of which disappeared with everyone presumed dead and another which was not even within the area of the 13 colonies which founded the country, and then he mentioned Black people in Bermuda which never became part of this nation at all. I understand what he's getting at when he says that those stories shouldn't be downplayed, but that's a personal choice, there's nothing "inaccurate" about starting the Black American narrative in 1619 because those were literally the first Black people who became ancestors of the foundational Americans.

Also, fabricating quotes and attribution them to me surely must violate forum rules, which you’re so heavy on. No?

Funny how you're always making wild accusations without receipts. If you think I violated forum rules then man up and demonstrate it. If you're too chicken shyt to put your own words to the test and are just trying to deflect, then you do you.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

There’s documented evidence of the project’s inaccuracies. The title is ironic, is all.

If there's documented evidence of the project's inaccuracies, then why did you post a critique that didn't even highlight any factual inaccuracies? The link you posted (which you either didn't read or didn't understand) merely offered yet another competing narrative, which is actually even more radical than the narrative of the 1619 project. It didn't note any inaccuracies, it just made different choices about what should be prioritized and highlighted.

 

[Shogun]

Are there black kids who are subjected to you or just white ones?




The whole point of the project is to offer a competing narrative. But you claimed they didn't intend to be accurate, which is NOT the meaning of a competing narrative.




His point wasn't a true "factual inaccuracy". He took issue with the project focusing the start of the black American narrative in 1619. But the counterexamples he gave were two failed colonies, one of which disappeared with everyone presumed dead and another which was not even within the area of the 13 colonies which founded the country, and then he mentioned Black people in Bermuda which never became part of this nation at all. I understand what he's getting at when he says that those stories shouldn't be downplayed, but that's a personal choice, there's nothing "inaccurate" about starting the Black American narrative in 1619 because those were literally the first Black people who became ancestors of the foundational Americans.




Funny how you're always making wild accusations without receipts. If you think I violated forum rules then man up and demonstrate it. If you're too chicken shyt to put your own words to the test and are just trying to deflect, then you do you.

Did you seriously just make up racist quotes, attribute them to me, and then put the onus on me to prove they’re false?

Wow.

 

[Shogun]

If there's documented evidence of the project's inaccuracies, then why did you post a critique that didn't even highlight any factual inaccuracies? The link you posted (which you either didn't read or didn't understand) merely offered yet another competing narrative, which is actually even more radical than the narrative of the 1619 project. It didn't note any inaccuracies, it just made different choices about what should be prioritized and highlighted.

You’re trolling now, right?

There are important historical correctives to the myth of 1619 that can help us ask better questions about the past. Most obviously, 1619 was not the first time Africans could be found in an English Atlantic colony, and it certainly wasn’t the first time people of African descent made their mark and imposed their will on the land that would someday be part of the United States. As early as May 1616, Blacks from the West Indies were already at work in Bermuda providing expert knowledge about the cultivation of tobacco. There is also suggestive evidence that scores of Africans plundered from the Spanish were aboard a fleet under the command of Sir Francis Drake when he arrived at Roanoke Island in 1586. In 1526, enslaved Africans were part of a Spanish expedition to establish an outpost on the North American coast in present-day South Carolina. Those Africans launched a rebellion in November of that year and effectively destroyed the Spanish settlers’ ability to sustain the settlement, which they abandoned a year later. Nearly 100 years before Jamestown, African actors enabled American colonies to survive, and they were equally able to destroy European colonial ventures.

And, yes, I’m well aware that article is in favor of more accurate interpretation. You calling accuracy “radical” is strange.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Did you seriously just make up racist quotes, attribute them to me, and then put the onus on me to prove they’re false?

Wow.

Like I thought, you're too chickenshyt to put your own words out there.

All my family comes from southern Italy, and we're darker....does that mean I get to say n...n...never mind

What have any of you cacs done to try and mitigate the disaster your ancestors created ?

1. My ancestors were poor Italian farmers. My grandparents came to the US in the 1920's, were poor as shyt, and were treated like dog shyt. The reality is, the majority of whites in this country have absolutely no connection in their ancestry to slavery. This question is stupid.

I just wish they admit the shyt (Slavers) because their ancestors admitted it.

the thing is, the majority of white people in America don't have slave-owning ancestry.

What are yall even talking about
What does freedom of speech have to do with the US toppling democratically elected governments and installing/supporting authoritarian ones in every continent for the last sixty years
That is the very definition of threatening democracy
Lack of free speech in China vs. supporting coup d'etats for fun, there is hardly any comparison

Long Peace - Wikipedia

Must be a coincidence.

More than once you've tried to downplay the importance of slavery in the history of this country, downplay White supremacy in this country, and just recently you tried to pushback on the damage that American-led White supremacy has done to the rest of the world by pushing the bullshyt "Long Peace" narrative (sure wasn't a long peace for Africa, Asia, the Middle East, or Latin America, was it?).

 

[Professor Emeritus]

You’re trolling now, right?


And, yes, I’m well aware that article is in favor of more accurate interpretation. You calling accuracy “radical” is strange.

All this bullshytting and you still haven't even named a single inaccuracy in the project. There wasn't ONE inaccuracy in the project noted in that article you linked. You brag about being a fukking history teacher and yet you still haven't been able to distinguish the difference between facts and narrative.

 

[Shogun]

Like I thought, you're too chickenshyt to put your own words out there.















More than once you've tried to downplay the importance of slavery in the history of this country, downplay White supremacy in this country, and just recently you tried to pushback on the damage that American-led White supremacy has done to the rest of the world by pushing the bullshyt "Long Peace" narrative (sure wasn't a long peace for Africa, Asia, the Middle East, or Latin America, was it?).

You win.
I don’t remember posting those but have no excuse.

 

[get these nets]

Since you’re probably going to start crying about forum rules and call me a white supremacist, here’s an article pointing out the projects short-comings from another of it proponents.

The Fallacy of 1619: Rethinking the History of Africans in Early America | AAIHS

Please advise if I’m following the rules to your liking.

Hate to bust your bubble, but the criticisms of the 1619 project have been brought and discussed in the general threads about them in 3 sections of the board. Do a quick search.

Wouldn't want you to think that you were parachuting in here and enlightening us.

 

[get these nets]

@EndDomination
Congrats on finishing Law School. You are now an elitist.

hehehe

 

[get these nets]

So, is your fellow board member an elitist or do we start getting into the murky DJ Pooh grey territory?

 

[88m3]

lol what's going on in here?

Not that I look for him but I haven't seen Tom Cotton in the news much lately....